I am of the age where military conscription was very much part of my generations lives.
For all males, when reaching the age of 18, we had to register for the military draft. When I registered it was right before the War in Vietnam escalated and going to war was the furthest thing in my mind. Within a little over a year, it was more than just a possibility but a strong probability.
From 1965 to 1973 hundreds of thousands were drafted into the military to supply the manpower to fight an unpopular war. Just as in previous generations, the military draft was not evenly applied to all eligible males. There were a number of legitimate means for avoiding the draft or service. In earlier times one could hire someone to serve in your place, but during the Vietnam Era one couldn’t hire someone to serve for you, but exemptions could be gained by attending college.
Many young men volunteered to serve in the National Guard or Reserves to avoid seeing actual combat, mitigating the risk yet still fulfilling their duty. It quickly became obvious that the military draft was discriminatory, with the vast majority of draftees coming from the lower and middle classes. The draft became such a contentious issue that the public will was to eliminate it and the military was more than happy to step away from dealing with draftees. In the perfect world of theory, an all-volunteer force could handle the future defense needs.
However, when we, as a nation, entered the 21st century and engaged in two major conflicts, some hard facts emerged questioning the wisdom of our decision to eliminate the draft.
From our shortsightedness, to barely provide enough troops to support the conflicts, we have activated National Guard units, called up reserves and required military personnel to repeatedly go into harm’s way with multiple deployments. It has had a devastating impact on a small percentage of the American population, but in general has not required the general American public to share in the sacrifice, that in the past accompanied major conflicts.
For most Americans, it has meant business as usual except for putting magnetic signs on cars supporting the troops and flying the flag. So uncommitted to the reality of war has been the population and our politicians, taxes have been significantly reduced, even as spending has increased to support the military. Now we have a situation of gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands because of the huge unfunded national debt we have accumulated over the last decade. There is a solution if we want to take it, Mandatory National Service for all males and females at the age of 19.
Under my proposal, all 19-year-old youth would be required to serve two years in National Service. This would include service in the military, service in public health, service in a new revitalized Civilian Conservation Corps, service in public schools, service in child welfare agencies and service in guarding the borders.
All able-bodied youth would go through four months of initial training to transition them from civilian life to service life. During this period of time they would be exposed to discipline, given a series of aptitude tests, and increase their general fitness levels. At the end of the training period they would be assigned to a service organization with the military and border patrol having the first pick. Based on fitness and aptitude, they then would be given further specialized training.
The advantages to society would be to take the nation’s youth and mold them into citizens who understand the needs of a larger society, provide the nation with important services, teach them how to work, help them mature, understand directed and disciplined behavior, provide them with basic life skills and reduce the numbers of listless, goalless idle youth.
In my proposal the youth would be paid and housed, provided healthcare and could gain benefits for post-secondary education. For example: Those serving in the military and border patrol would be given funding for two years of post-secondary education at a public institution for each year of service. Others would receive one year for each year served. Other benefits could be low-cost financing for their first home purchase and low-cost financing for business start-ups.
I think that requiring mandatory public service would, over time, benefit the nation by everyone having to put some “skin into the game."
Which part of US history are you expert in? You challenge people with oblique stabs. Curious about the platform from which you address the people on this thread.
Let's see, they can marry, be a soldier, buy a gun, drive, vote, BE REQUIRED TO SERVE (what?) but they still won't be able to go to a bar and order a drink.......
Yet I have 2 major concerns: 1) Your statement "take the nation’s youth and mold them into citizens who understand the needs of a larger society" is a heavily progressive, it takes a village, type statement. While you include the military as one of the services; the rest belong to the nanny state empire being built in the US. A system as this would add huge layers of bureaucracy to an already bloated system. 2) The issue with today's idle youth has nothing to do with national service. The youth toady are being raised by a public education system to concerned with its own growth then the ability of our students to succeed. The goal of high school currently is not to create workers, but to push more and more kids into college. Clogging our system with young adults that should have been working a trade rather then getting a bachelors in Post-Modern Western European Fecal Drawing. If I could, I would amend your idea and incorporate into the high school curriculum. Require classes that include high community involvement in some of the areas you suggest. Give the ROTC higher access to recruiting. Return shop classes and apprentice work in the various trades, making low level shop classes required for graduation. Reducing the college burden to those that actually need further education.
As to your second concern; I whole support the idea of revamping public school curriculum. I have always thought that we have done a great disservice to our youth by not promoting skills development. As you know, I have written extensively about this subject in the past. However, mandatory service would help to teach and enhance skill levels. If the young person then wanted to go onto a post secondary program, the means would be available.
The distinction here is voluntary. The pay for volunteering is somewhere between little and nothing, so we aren't spending money we don't have. We've seen the deleterious effect the draft has on the quality of the military, and it would have the same impact on the other services you describe. Our voluntary military, athough stretched thin in your mind, remains a superb force. This isn't by accident. It is because those that serve want to be there. There is a lesson there. Although I almost never agree with you, I never doubt your patriotism. Thank you for your service.
I wouldn't object at all for youth to be teaching firearm safety and firearm skills. As a matter of fact we could have a much more extensive program if we attached a cadet corps to the DNR. This group could also work in wetlands restoration and other projects to help in the environment and conservation. Most hunters I know are very much concerned with conservation. During the training period, aptitude tests would be done to help assign people to various fields that they may be interested in or a proclivity for. As far as making service mandatory, I think it would not carry the same impact and there wouldn't be the necessary motivation to carry through with projects. As far as costs are concerned, how much are idle youth costing us now? I think it would cut down considerably on out of wedlock pregnancies, crimes committed by youth, etc. I appreciated your kind words and willingness to consider additional options.
In the past, Lyle you wrote of that in one of your prior articles . You were definitely closer to the right track there. At least there we all agree public education has become pretty much a enormous failure. Clearly, with the massive deficit we face there would be no stomach for another so called Liberal Right to tell American's how to live their lives.
My children, and their friends, are not idle and goalless. They work. They try hard to get an education so that they can support themselves as adults. They play sports, music and do scouting and other community service. Just because there are some youth that are hopeless (and whose fault is that?) - does not mean that you can use a stroke of the pen to paint them all as idle bums. Open your eyes to the quiet majority that are good, and even productive! junior members of society. Our society has vilified skilled trades for so long, and lowered the value of most work to the point that even a good college education may not be enough to get a job that pays a living wage.Forcing a two year wait in the midst of higher education will only delay even longer the time until these youth become full "adult" members of the community. God bless those that do serve in our military - and my husband and I are among that number - but YOU may not decide to draft MY family, and, incidentally, my paycheck - to pay for a program to fix a problem that doesn't exist. And, by the way, this proposal is a fascist idea, not a "liberal" one.
I agree that not all youth are goalless and idle, but just because your children and others aren't doesn't mean that they should be exempt from serving the needs of a greater society. What price is freedom and citizenship. You are obviously unaware of the world outside the confines of your world. We are only as strong as our youth and doing what we can do to strengthen their preparation to join society is a small price to pay for the benefits gained. BTW this proposal is no more fascist than serving in scouting.
I am not advocating State Worship as did Hitler and Stalin demanded. Why should so small a portion of the population put themselves in harms way? Shouldn't we all sacrifice a little for the greater good?
Ask any career military person if they want to return to the days of conscripts and they will tell you "no, thank you!". There are many good reasons why we went to an all volunteer force after the Vietnam Era debacle and it has improved our military and our security immensely. I respectfully submit that compulsory "service" is not a good idea. Yes, there are places in the world that require it's citizens to be trained in the military and be members of a national guard. If I lived in a place that is constantly under attack, I may have a different opinion, but this is the USA - not Israel. Do I believe in community service as an integral part of citizenship? Yes. I have instilled that into my children, and I practice what I preach. Do I think we should forcibly command this service? No.
One of the major illnesses of our society comes from the inability of many of it's adults to have disagreements in a rational fashion without resorting to personal attacks and incivility. If an idea can't stand on it's own merits, trying to belittle a person in order to throw up a smokescreen is rather - well, lame is a word the kids might use. Have a good day.
Our nation has struggled with ever extending youth dependency. The current conditions have many adult children still living with their families of origin because of reduced opportunities that previous generations have had. Pulling youth out of the workforce for a two year period and will help better use the available manpower in the employment sector. If you add two to four years of education after completion of service, entering the workforce at an older and more mature age with valuable skills learned from mandatory service and advanced education. Those who choose to enter the workforce right after completion of service are better prepared to take advantage of employment opportunities, including OJT skills training such as the skilled trades. I am fully aware of how the professional military feels about conscription and there is much to be said for that position. However, there are offsetting benefits for using conscription, including force strength.
In response to your statement about other nations requiring compulsory service; the last time I checked, Denmark isn't under constant threat to their security. You seem to be overly focused on the military, but very few would serve in the armed services in comparison to the other service corps. You still haven't provided a good reason why compulsory service is not a good idea. In defense of mandatory service, it would provide immense benefit to the nation, our youth and would have a minimum impact on the lives of those who serve. I agree with your statement that I don't know you. I can only go by what you have written and little else. However, from what you have written it would be rational to assume you have a very narrow view of the wider issues. This is not an insult but a statement of perceptual fact.
That's why it's an idea from a bubble . Because you don't immediately recognize the obvious. Don't feel too bad, it has happen to our President as well .